Writers, can we agree that every religion seeks God?

I am on a new journey to learn more about religions otherwise foreign to me. Recognizing my limitations, I humbly make this attempt to express where I am now and to seek other writers along this pathway. 

Through different ways and histories, cultural and otherwise...religions claim to 'seek God.' This is something we share. "Seek My face," God has said in Hebrew scriptures (for example, Psalm 27:8).  

Literature is full of cultural and religious beliefs colliding due to blindness about  key  similarities. For example, in The Last Mughal (I am half-way at over 400 pages), the destruction of the Mughal dynasty in Delhi, India, 1857, is connected to belief as much as to political and power conflicts. They are inherently interwoven, and the emperor's court aimed to be tolerant of Christian presence. At least at the beginning and compelled to allow their presence.     

Followers saw their Delhi Mughal as being close to or second to 'God, the Almighty.' Yet, did this mean that the Mughal would have closed his mind against conversation about 'the Son of God'? I cannot help wondering about his reaction, if he had heard of Jesus as the Lord via a friend's discourse rather than a foreigner's conquering presence.

John 3:16* is truth without labels. It must have been familiar to British Christians occupying India in the 19th century. In that scripture, God shows that He is reaching out to everyone, regardless; and cultural and religious identities are not mentioned.  

Jesus said (John 3:16), "God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son that whosoever believes on Him shall be saved" (italics added). God speaks in love to 'the world,' of His 'only begotten Son.' The receiving audience is the world; the subject and gift is the Son. The Son is not mentioned with cultural, traditional, religious, or national connections. The Son is 'culture-free' in God's broad scope for the world. Jesus speaks for God without judging other "belief systems," as they are called today. See John 3:17.      

India, 19th century, included intellectual, literate, productive, artful, and wealthy persons and groups that, at first, accepted or allowed the presence of British military and East India Company ('the Company') workers. These were prominently allied with Christian faith. British families lived in homes designed to please them; they worshiped at churches built according to Indian or British design. Yet, British military leaders that harshly disrespected their hosts' beliefs and culture/way of life refused to consider them even as 'hosts.' An important few preferred to see them as 'the occupied,' or even 'the conquered.' Inevitably, the term 'Christian' and 'cruel conqueror' became synonymous. No wonder. The Mughal Dynasty of Delhi would be killed off cruelly by those identified with 'Christianity.'     

A Muslim friend from India gave my husband and me a copy of The Last Mughal. As Christian and American, I find the story helps to strengthen my desire to know better the beliefs of other religions. I maintain the whole and basics of Christian faith while wanting to know more about those who are neighbors or members of the wider community, in positive ways.  I will know them, I believe, as friends, at least a few. Not knowing any atheists free of argument or anger, I likely will not have dialogue there. Otherwise, the love of Christ compels this desire' to learn about how 'seeking God' has shaped others' beliefs. Seeking those loved of God strengthens my desire to seek Him continually through Christ and His ways. "God so loved the world.... I did not come to judge the world...." 

If you are writing about these themes, I would like to know about your work.

*If the Bible is new to you, there is Old Testament (Hebrew and Aramaic, originally) and New Testament (original in Greek). The books have names, e.g. 'Genesis' or 'John' and chapter and verse numbers (e.g., John 3:16; or 3.16).

American pressures on Egypt

Protesters against President Mubarak's fifth term. Free documentation license. Image via Wikipedia

Opinion
by Jean Purcell

Egypt now is at the forefront of crisis, a land of the Nile, the world's longest river, and a largely Muslim population (about six to ten percent Christian or other), past pharaohs, present beauty and Arab context, and...a long-standing dictator, President Hosni Mubarak. To what extent should the US leadership comment on Egypt's present crisis of power? Should it again use different high-level voices to deliver differing messages, some hinting at psychological-political coercion? Is this the right situation for such diplomatic styles? Should US leadership again try to dictate, or again apply public pressure on, the internal affairs of another sovereign nation?

Egypt is a nation of heavy-hitting political and religious powers. Significant numbers of its population are rising up and protesting, demanding political, national, and individual freedoms long denied to them. The problem of the answer being framed by the US goes beyond Egyptian history, language, accomplishments, and geographical beauty. The depths of any answer are not easily or quickly plumbed. They affect the heart of a culture that is deep, rich, expressive, and deeply proud, for many good reasons. Is this national need for change a matter in which the US leadership should encourage and try to hearten the protesters in ways that stop short of American leadership lecturing the Egyptian leadership in front of the world?

Powers are working on all sides, some good and some not, in the forefront and behind the scenes. Who is wearing a mask, speaking with deceitful intent and who is risking the right to be "out there" with honest hopes and dreams for better opportunities free of fear? 

In the best and worst situations, nations and cultures have an intrinsic array of thought patterns that guide the present and future. This array can create powerful and unique currents out of crises, currents that can carry forward for good or lead to further stagnation or damming up of events. One outside nation intending to guide another nation's decisions and outcomes in full view must do so knowledgeably and with careful abilities to apply pressure correctly, at the right place and time. Moratorium, dictating of terms, or applied pressure for other nations' desired outcomes will not work apart from great risk of achieving little more than undesirable, or even dangerous, long-terms results. 

US leadership is trying to overlay American solutions onto Egyptian events. US thinking and method could easily create a seemingly good plan that is actually explosive, with painful reverberations in the region and around the world. One hopes not. One wishes that daring rhetoric might carry the day, but one wonders, "Is not the stake very high, to pressure something that one cannot 'fix' if it backfires now or later, the shards hitting others, not one's self?"

Are America's foreign policy analysts and experts paying enough attention t0 the complexities of Egypt's norms and the undercurrents? 

One obvious example is "loss of face," an extreme anathema to an Egyptian of power. An American Nixon or Clinton may be willing to endure losing face at home. Would an Egyptian president like Mubarak willingly risk losing face in the eyes of the world if he perceived himself coerced from without, not within his homeland? Unwilling, should he be strong-armed by the leadership of the free world, an outside nation, and other foreign, western pressures?

Do Americans in charge at home understand the importance of what losing face means to an Egyptian? Are they fully aware to risk horrible long-term outcomes?

Understandably, many Egyptians oppose their president-ruler by speaking, risking, protesting, demanding, and insisting...all in the strongest terms. Those actions are citizen-rights that are assumed and also are inspiring or dismaying many inside and outside Egypt.

Unfortunately, American decision-makers at highest levels of the US government, from the president and secretary of state have come to the point of insisting, dictating, or dealing for an outcome desired in the US rather than an outcome reached in Egypt. After the outcome, Americans would not be there to implement, clearly, or to control the consequences.

Are these risks and behaviors that the American government should exhibit? With little time given to say, "We're following the situation closely," conflicting views and answers came from the highest levels of the US government. With little moment given to waiting, watching, and evaluating beyond and behind the obvious, it appears, judgments were jumped into very quickly and, possibly, carelessly.

The best intentions, the best and brightest minds can lead us wrongly. We have learned this as Americans. The best people can get it all wrong. This is not a political matter, but one of good governance and leadership.

The US should rethink, restudy, and get fresh and broader insight from others not yet consulted. At this hour, the Egyptian military holds the line in Cairo and elsewhere in Egypt as no other entity can. Let's hope they, too, proceed wisely, intelligently, and with thought to consequences. In specific ways, Egypt appears to be changing now, overnight, for the better.

However, the final scene has not yet been played. The process needs to lead to better, not worse, outcomes. The specter of Cuba during revolution, what was expected and what actually slid into place, hovers in the mind. It is good that today President Obama's tone softened regarding the insistent outcomes and who shall decide them, while more resolved regarding the safety of protesters, activists, and the press.

Related articles to read and assess:

• US intel missed Tunisia, Egypt uprisings (hotair.com)
• Alarmed by Cairo - Mullen: Egypt took me 'by surprise' (politico.com)
• Iran's Khamenei praises Egyptian protesters, declares 'Islamic awakening' - Christian Science Monitor (news.google.com)
• Foreign Policy: A Lost Chance For Democracy In Egypt (npr.org)
• White House: Mubarak has chance to show who he is (seattletimes.nwsource.com)
• Mubarak Firms Up His Grip on Power (themoderatevoice.com)
• US in Talks With Egypt for Mubarak to Resign Immediately - Voice of America (news.google.com)
• Iran Praises Parallels of Egypt's "Islamic Awakening" Protests (waronterrornews.typepad.com)